R v Manuel - [2025] NZHC 1787

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE

CRI-2023-088-840

[2025] NZHC 1787

THE KING

v

SAMSON THOMAS MANUEL and BRONSON TAMATI MANUEL

Hearing: 1 July 2025

Counsel:

BM O’Connor for Crown

R Mansfield KC (by VMR) and W Mohammed for Samson Thomas Manuel
JA Young and AB Fairley for Bronson Tamati Manuel

Sentencing:

1 July 2025

SENTENCE OF GAULT J

Solicitors / Counsel:
B M O’Connor MWIS Lawyers, Whangārei R Mansfield KC, Barrister, Auckland
J A Young, Barrister, Whangārei
A B Fairley, Thomson Wilson Whangārei

R v ST MANUEL and BT MANUEL [2025] NZHC 1787 [1 July 2025]

[1] Samson Manuel, you appear today for sentencing having pleaded guilty to a charge of murder.1 The maximum sentence for murder is life imprisonment.

[2] Bronson Manuel, you appear for sentencing having pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent to injure.2 The maximum sentence for this offence is seven years’ imprisonment.

[3]This is the sentencing process I will follow:

(a)first, I will outline the circumstances of your offending;

(b)secondly, I will refer to the victim impact statements that have been read;

(c)thirdly, I will explain the approach to setting the sentence and the requirements of the Sentencing Act 2002 as they apply in your case Samson Manuel;

(d)fourthly, I will consider your relevant personal circumstances as they have been put before the Court;

(e)next, I will determine and impose the appropriate sentence for you;

(f)then, I will explain the approach to setting the sentence and the requirements of the Sentencing Act as they apply in your case Bronson Manuel;

(g)I will then consider your relevant personal circumstances as they have been put before the Court; and

(h)finally, I will determine and impose the appropriate sentence for you.

1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 167 and 172. Maximum penalty life imprisonment.
2 Crimes Act 1961, ss 66, 188(2). Maximum penalty seven years’ imprisonment.

The offending

[4] I begin by setting out the facts of your offending in Whangārei on the evening on 15 April 2023.

[5]You are brothers.

[6] The victim in this case is Mr Shayden Perkinson, aged 25. He was not known to either of you.

[7] You both were at the Night and Day, Gull service station located in Raumanga, Whangārei that evening. You arrived at 9:30 pm. At the time you both had light coloured material wrapped over your heads and covering your mouth and nose, in a balaclava style, so only your eyes were visible.

[8] Samson Manuel, you were in the possession of a large kitchen knife secreted up your right sleeve. At the time the knife was not visible.

[9] You both were intending to commit a “standover” of the Night and Day, Gull service station. Samson Manuel, you told police you had the knife to do a standover of the shopkeeper for money.

[10] There is a Westpac ATM machine located on the outside corner of the Night and Day service station.

[11] When you…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Manuel

Details

AGLC: R v Manuel [2025] NZHC 1787
Case: [2025] NZHC 1787
Decision Date: 1 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Samson Thomas Manuel and Bronson Tamati Manuel, the appellants, appeared before Gault J in the High Court of New Zealand Whangarei Registry for sentencing following their guilty pleas to charges of murder and causing grievous bodily harm with intent, respectively. The court outlined the circumstances of their offending, which involved an attack on Mr Shayden Perkinson at a service station, culminating in his death due to a stab wound inflicted by Samson. Bronson was involved in the assault but did not deliver the fatal blow. The court considered victim impact statements, the statutory presumption of life imprisonment for murder, and the purposes and principles of sentencing under the Sentencing Act 2002. In sentencing, Gault J determined a starting point for Samson's minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of 12 years, adjusted for aggravating and mitigating factors, resulting in a final sentence of life imprisonment with an MPI of 10.5 years. For Bronson, the court set a starting point of three years, reduced by personal factors and a guilty plea discount, culminating in a sentence of 19 months’ imprisonment.

In conclusion, Samson Manuel was sentenced to life imprisonment with an MPI of 10.5 years, and Bronson Manuel was sentenced to 19 months’ imprisonment. The court meticulously considered the nature of the offending, the impact on the victim's family, and the appellants' personal circumstances in arriving at these sentences.

Orders